GustavBahler wrote:Sounds like a martial arts film. We would really be lucky to find a talent like Monk available at 8. Speaks to the depth of the draft pool. This team really needs a good one, two punch going forward.

fishmike wrote:

nixluva wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

nixluva wrote:PHUCK the jokes and personal attacks! Guys see what they want and have Blind spots for what is right in front of them! The article did touch on different aspects of Monk's game.

Monk was excellent in the pick-and-roll this season, in an admittedly small sample size of 66 possessions. When you include the shots that came from his passes, he generated 1.015 points per possession, putting him in the 85th percentile of NCAA players. Defenses have a tough time guarding Monk in the two-man game because of how quickly he can rise and fire off the dribble. You can’t go under the screen on Monk, and dropping back even a little is an invitation for him to shoot

As a POINT GUARD versus a SG Monk will have more opportunities as a PnR Ball Handler so YES this is a hidden dimension to his game! Also teams packed it in against UK since they didn't have other 3pt threats. That's going to change in the NBA!!!

Monk doesn't have to turn into CP3 in order to be effective as a PG for the Knicks in the Triangle!!!
There's some ability to work with

Nix, I thought you posted the whole article. I didn't read your intro. I apologize. I know you are passionate and have facts to back up your points.

Sorry I got heated. I just get tired of some of Cliche Nix Attacks trying to make me sound irrational. I'm not an idiot and after a while it gets beyond annoying to read jokes suggesting I am.

nobody is attacking you... but a little poke is fun now and then
I would suggest decaf though... damn

I stick by what I say though... I like Monk as a prospect, but there is a ton he hasn't show and was a pretty average defender in college with Fox taking the tougher guard pretty much every time.

Now I do think Monk as the lowest bust potential. He's gonna be a useful rotation guy, but he certainly *appears* to lack the 2-way upside of a guy like Ntilikina with great hops AND a 7 foot plus wingspan. We will see who Phil likes. Monk is prob the most sure thing to note bust, but do you see him shutting anyone down in the NBA? Anyone? Thats part of it... at least if we are talking building block guys. I would like a building block guy vs. a role player. Now there is more risk in that as well... so I do ack the pendulum swings both ways

Monk is a good defender. I don't know where you get this notion he's not. He has good lateral quickness and challenges shots. He's not a special defensive prospect but he is good enough. His Defensive Rating was 100 which as a small SG was good.

Despite what you think Monk has GREAT potential. As the article mentions he was the only legit 3pt shooter and so teams packed the paint daring the Wildcats to shoot from 3! That means Monk didn't have lanes very often. He'll get many more openings to attack in the NBA!

Just so we're clear you can only GUESS as to whether Ntilikina can take over games like Monk! The same goes for his defense against NBA PG's. The quickness of NBA PG's is unmatched in the French League! Monk has more burst and explosion than Nitty. Monk has shown he's up to the task of being a Primary scorer. 47, 37, 34, 33, 27, 27... Monk isn't a mystery in this regard. You give Monk space and he's gonna produce. Nitty is still working on his handles. He's nowhere close to Elite in this regard.

newyorknewyork wrote:

Welpee wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

Welpee wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

Welpee wrote:I've decided Monk or Ntilkina are the two guys I would be OK with out of this draft given our draft position. I want no part of Dennis Smith. Too many red flags for me. Even if he has Westbrook-like talent he has team killer written all over him from what I've read.

If you go back and read Steph Curry's pre-draft analysis, it sounds a lot like Monk's with Curry being a slightly better shooter and Monk being more athletic. As of right now, I lean towards drafting Monk. Ntilkina may have been the move if we had more pieces currently in place.

Full disclosure (and I have to always say this) - I wanted Mudiay over Okafor, Russell and KP so I have no credibility! lol

Curry gave you 3 years of data and proved he could give you PG level vision and passing. Displaying some high level hard to make passes. Remember watching the Bob Knight break down of his game and becoming convinced he was the real deal.

With Monk we are only hoping. At the same time Curry became Curry due to his tireless work ethic. If Monk is willing to put in the same type of work then who know what he can become. But thats on him.

Curry only played the point his junior season and was still more of a shooting guard than a passing guard, so I'm not sure how much vision he displayed jacking up 20 shots a game at Davidson. Bob Knight also thought Calbert Cheaney was the real deal.

There were a lot of question marks about Curry too when he was drafted so he was far from being considered a can't miss pick. But let's be real, anybody you pick at 8 is going to have question marks. It's not like Ntilkina or Dennis Smith or anybody else projected to be available at 8 are going to be safer picks. Beside, can we afford to be safe? We need home run picks.

Of course there were question marks. It wasnt just Bob Knight saying that Curry was going to be able to translate into a PG. He showed why and the film stood out more so then Knights words. Curry was never going to be Steve Nash in terms of passing. But he displayed enough to show he can play PG in this league which turned out to be correct.

We have to careful about revisionist history. When players become great in the NBA we like to think the consensus was most saw it from day one and when a guy's a bust people claim they knew that too. Steph was the third point guard selected at #7. Minnesota needing a point guard devoted picks #5 and #6 to filling that need and passed twice on Steph.

But my main point is there were just as many questions about Steph pre-draft as there appears to be with Monk. I initially was against considering Monk because of his size but the more I read up on him and think about other players who either overcame not being the ideal height for their position or having to play a different role in the league, I'm willing to co-sign on selecting him.

If you're not on board with Monk, who do you want to see the Knicks select?

I wasn't speaking on general consensus about Curry. I was speaking on how I personally was blown away by Steph's film when Bob Knight evaluated his PG skills.

I also stated that Curry became the player he did due to tireless work ethic and if Monk is willing to put in the same type of work who knows what he could become.

But still Curry had 3 years of college experience to develop his game before he came to the NBA. Even if he played PG full time for one season he still had 3 total years of College experience. Monk has one year with limited time at PG. Maybe it turns out to mean very little and he is just that talented. Maybe it takes him a little longer getting comfortable being a full time PG then it took Curry. Maybe he never gets comfortable and becomes a full time SG. Either way the guy can fill it up.

I am hoping for Isaac, and I slightly favor Frank N over Monk. But I wouldn't be upset at all of Monk ended up being our pick. Just not ready to believe he is the next Steph Curry.

If you look at history only one maybe two of these guys will end up in the hall of fame, maybe 5 or 6 will eventually be an all-star and the rest of this draft will be a bunch of role players or out of the league in five years. The Knicks have to select one of the future all-stars at minimum.

There are a ton of question marks surrounding Isaac too (who also only played one year) not to mention Florida State hasn't exactly been a factory of elite NBA talent. Who was the last star NBA player out of Florida State, Sam Cassell? Issac could be another Stromile Swift, Anthony Randolph, Austin Daye, Brandan Wright type pick. Long, tall, very athletic, very thin player who make people drool at the combines with his measurables but ends up doing nothing in the league. I'd pass on him (but I would've passed on KP too).

nixluva wrote:

fishmike wrote:

nixluva wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

nixluva wrote:PHUCK the jokes and personal attacks! Guys see what they want and have Blind spots for what is right in front of them! The article did touch on different aspects of Monk's game.

Monk was excellent in the pick-and-roll this season, in an admittedly small sample size of 66 possessions. When you include the shots that came from his passes, he generated 1.015 points per possession, putting him in the 85th percentile of NCAA players. Defenses have a tough time guarding Monk in the two-man game because of how quickly he can rise and fire off the dribble. You can’t go under the screen on Monk, and dropping back even a little is an invitation for him to shoot

As a POINT GUARD versus a SG Monk will have more opportunities as a PnR Ball Handler so YES this is a hidden dimension to his game! Also teams packed it in against UK since they didn't have other 3pt threats. That's going to change in the NBA!!!

Monk doesn't have to turn into CP3 in order to be effective as a PG for the Knicks in the Triangle!!!
There's some ability to work with

Nix, I thought you posted the whole article. I didn't read your intro. I apologize. I know you are passionate and have facts to back up your points.

Sorry I got heated. I just get tired of some of Cliche Nix Attacks trying to make me sound irrational. I'm not an idiot and after a while it gets beyond annoying to read jokes suggesting I am.

nobody is attacking you... but a little poke is fun now and then
I would suggest decaf though... damn

I stick by what I say though... I like Monk as a prospect, but there is a ton he hasn't show and was a pretty average defender in college with Fox taking the tougher guard pretty much every time.

Now I do think Monk as the lowest bust potential. He's gonna be a useful rotation guy, but he certainly *appears* to lack the 2-way upside of a guy like Ntilikina with great hops AND a 7 foot plus wingspan. We will see who Phil likes. Monk is prob the most sure thing to note bust, but do you see him shutting anyone down in the NBA? Anyone? Thats part of it... at least if we are talking building block guys. I would like a building block guy vs. a role player. Now there is more risk in that as well... so I do ack the pendulum swings both ways

Monk is a good defender. I don't know where you get this notion he's not. He has good lateral quickness and challenges shots. He's not a special defensive prospect but he is good enough. His Defensive Rating was 100 which as a small SG was good.

Despite what you think Monk has GREAT potential. As the article mentions he was the only legit 3pt shooter and so teams packed the paint daring the Wildcats to shoot from 3! That means Monk didn't have lanes very often. He'll get many more openings to attack in the NBA!

Just so we're clear you can only GUESS as to whether Ntilikina can take over games like Monk! The same goes for his defense against NBA PG's. The quickness of NBA PG's is unmatched in the French League! Monk has more burst and explosion than Nitty. Monk has shown he's up to the task of being a Primary scorer. 47, 37, 34, 33, 27, 27... Monk isn't a mystery in this regard. You give Monk space and he's gonna produce. Nitty is still working on his handles. He's nowhere close to Elite in this regard.

It seems you have decided that Monk is the guy and your just going to spazz out at any notion that he's not perfect in every way. Always makes for a fun discussion.

Welpee wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

Welpee wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

Welpee wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

Welpee wrote:I've decided Monk or Ntilkina are the two guys I would be OK with out of this draft given our draft position. I want no part of Dennis Smith. Too many red flags for me. Even if he has Westbrook-like talent he has team killer written all over him from what I've read.

If you go back and read Steph Curry's pre-draft analysis, it sounds a lot like Monk's with Curry being a slightly better shooter and Monk being more athletic. As of right now, I lean towards drafting Monk. Ntilkina may have been the move if we had more pieces currently in place.

Full disclosure (and I have to always say this) - I wanted Mudiay over Okafor, Russell and KP so I have no credibility! lol

Curry gave you 3 years of data and proved he could give you PG level vision and passing. Displaying some high level hard to make passes. Remember watching the Bob Knight break down of his game and becoming convinced he was the real deal.

With Monk we are only hoping. At the same time Curry became Curry due to his tireless work ethic. If Monk is willing to put in the same type of work then who know what he can become. But thats on him.

Curry only played the point his junior season and was still more of a shooting guard than a passing guard, so I'm not sure how much vision he displayed jacking up 20 shots a game at Davidson. Bob Knight also thought Calbert Cheaney was the real deal.

There were a lot of question marks about Curry too when he was drafted so he was far from being considered a can't miss pick. But let's be real, anybody you pick at 8 is going to have question marks. It's not like Ntilkina or Dennis Smith or anybody else projected to be available at 8 are going to be safer picks. Beside, can we afford to be safe? We need home run picks.

Of course there were question marks. It wasnt just Bob Knight saying that Curry was going to be able to translate into a PG. He showed why and the film stood out more so then Knights words. Curry was never going to be Steve Nash in terms of passing. But he displayed enough to show he can play PG in this league which turned out to be correct.

We have to careful about revisionist history. When players become great in the NBA we like to think the consensus was most saw it from day one and when a guy's a bust people claim they knew that too. Steph was the third point guard selected at #7. Minnesota needing a point guard devoted picks #5 and #6 to filling that need and passed twice on Steph.

But my main point is there were just as many questions about Steph pre-draft as there appears to be with Monk. I initially was against considering Monk because of his size but the more I read up on him and think about other players who either overcame not being the ideal height for their position or having to play a different role in the league, I'm willing to co-sign on selecting him.

If you're not on board with Monk, who do you want to see the Knicks select?

I wasn't speaking on general consensus about Curry. I was speaking on how I personally was blown away by Steph's film when Bob Knight evaluated his PG skills.

I also stated that Curry became the player he did due to tireless work ethic and if Monk is willing to put in the same type of work who knows what he could become.

But still Curry had 3 years of college experience to develop his game before he came to the NBA. Even if he played PG full time for one season he still had 3 total years of College experience. Monk has one year with limited time at PG. Maybe it turns out to mean very little and he is just that talented. Maybe it takes him a little longer getting comfortable being a full time PG then it took Curry. Maybe he never gets comfortable and becomes a full time SG. Either way the guy can fill it up.

I am hoping for Isaac, and I slightly favor Frank N over Monk. But I wouldn't be upset at all of Monk ended up being our pick. Just not ready to believe he is the next Steph Curry.

Honestly, I don't think the Warriors knew they were getting what Steph Curry ended up being. And none of us know if any of these guys can be the next _______. I also didn't claim Monk was the next Steph, just said his pre-draft profile was very similar to his.

If you look at history only one maybe two of these guys will end up in the hall of fame, maybe 5 or 6 will eventually be an all-star and the rest of this draft will be a bunch of role players or out of the league in five years. The Knicks have to select one of the future all-stars at minimum.

There are a ton of question marks surrounding Isaac too (who also only played one year) not to mention Florida State hasn't exactly been a factory of elite NBA talent. Who was the last star NBA player out of Florida State, Sam Cassell? Issac could be another Stromile Swift, Anthony Randolph, Austin Daye, Brandan Wright type pick. Long, tall, very athletic, very thin player who make people drool at the combines with his measurables but ends up doing nothing in the league. I'd pass on him (but I would've passed on KP too).

I didn't expect Curry to becomes what he became either. Just thought he would be able to transition to PG in the NBA.

nixluva wrote:

fishmike wrote:

nixluva wrote:

fishmike wrote:

nixluva wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

nixluva wrote:PHUCK the jokes and personal attacks! Guys see what they want and have Blind spots for what is right in front of them! The article did touch on different aspects of Monk's game.

Monk was excellent in the pick-and-roll this season, in an admittedly small sample size of 66 possessions. When you include the shots that came from his passes, he generated 1.015 points per possession, putting him in the 85th percentile of NCAA players. Defenses have a tough time guarding Monk in the two-man game because of how quickly he can rise and fire off the dribble. You can’t go under the screen on Monk, and dropping back even a little is an invitation for him to shoot

As a POINT GUARD versus a SG Monk will have more opportunities as a PnR Ball Handler so YES this is a hidden dimension to his game! Also teams packed it in against UK since they didn't have other 3pt threats. That's going to change in the NBA!!!

Monk doesn't have to turn into CP3 in order to be effective as a PG for the Knicks in the Triangle!!!
There's some ability to work with

Nix, I thought you posted the whole article. I didn't read your intro. I apologize. I know you are passionate and have facts to back up your points.

Sorry I got heated. I just get tired of some of Cliche Nix Attacks trying to make me sound irrational. I'm not an idiot and after a while it gets beyond annoying to read jokes suggesting I am.

nobody is attacking you... but a little poke is fun now and then
I would suggest decaf though... damn

I stick by what I say though... I like Monk as a prospect, but there is a ton he hasn't show and was a pretty average defender in college with Fox taking the tougher guard pretty much every time.

Now I do think Monk as the lowest bust potential. He's gonna be a useful rotation guy, but he certainly *appears* to lack the 2-way upside of a guy like Ntilikina with great hops AND a 7 foot plus wingspan. We will see who Phil likes. Monk is prob the most sure thing to note bust, but do you see him shutting anyone down in the NBA? Anyone? Thats part of it... at least if we are talking building block guys. I would like a building block guy vs. a role player. Now there is more risk in that as well... so I do ack the pendulum swings both ways

Monk is a good defender. I don't know where you get this notion he's not. He has good lateral quickness and challenges shots. He's not a special defensive prospect but he is good enough. His Defensive Rating was 100 which as a small SG was good.

Despite what you think Monk has GREAT potential. As the article mentions he was the only legit 3pt shooter and so teams packed the paint daring the Wildcats to shoot from 3! That means Monk didn't have lanes very often. He'll get many more openings to attack in the NBA!

Just so we're clear you can only GUESS as to whether Ntilikina can take over games like Monk! The same goes for his defense against NBA PG's. The quickness of NBA PG's is unmatched in the French League! Monk has more burst and explosion than Nitty. Monk has shown he's up to the task of being a Primary scorer. 47, 37, 34, 33, 27, 27... Monk isn't a mystery in this regard. You give Monk space and he's gonna produce. Nitty is still working on his handles. He's nowhere close to Elite in this regard.

this is BS... you need to look again. The reason Ntilikina is so high on everyone's radar was his performance vs. the top youth in all of EU, where he took over on the both sides of the ball. His #s are modest on his pro team as he's a defensive bench player who's role is to handle the ball some, defend and stretch the floor.

It seems you have decided that Monk is the guy and your just going to spazz out at any notion that he's not perfect in every way. Always makes for a fun discussion.

You go find tape of Nitty displaying Elite burst, shake and Handles! How many full games of Ntilikina have you seen? I've watched several full games. We all know he has talent but that's not the same as saying he's in the same class as the top PG's in every way.

He's shown some defensive potential and good overall skills. You don't have any way to know if he has the Killer Mentality and Elite Quicks to match top PG's. I've never seen him jump off the tape in that way. He looks like a SG with some passing ability.

nixluva wrote:

fishmike wrote:

nixluva wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

nixluva wrote:PHUCK the jokes and personal attacks! Guys see what they want and have Blind spots for what is right in front of them! The article did touch on different aspects of Monk's game.

Monk was excellent in the pick-and-roll this season, in an admittedly small sample size of 66 possessions. When you include the shots that came from his passes, he generated 1.015 points per possession, putting him in the 85th percentile of NCAA players. Defenses have a tough time guarding Monk in the two-man game because of how quickly he can rise and fire off the dribble. You can’t go under the screen on Monk, and dropping back even a little is an invitation for him to shoot

As a POINT GUARD versus a SG Monk will have more opportunities as a PnR Ball Handler so YES this is a hidden dimension to his game! Also teams packed it in against UK since they didn't have other 3pt threats. That's going to change in the NBA!!!

Monk doesn't have to turn into CP3 in order to be effective as a PG for the Knicks in the Triangle!!!
There's some ability to work with

Nix, I thought you posted the whole article. I didn't read your intro. I apologize. I know you are passionate and have facts to back up your points.

Sorry I got heated. I just get tired of some of Cliche Nix Attacks trying to make me sound irrational. I'm not an idiot and after a while it gets beyond annoying to read jokes suggesting I am.

nobody is attacking you... but a little poke is fun now and then
I would suggest decaf though... damn

I stick by what I say though... I like Monk as a prospect, but there is a ton he hasn't show and was a pretty average defender in college with Fox taking the tougher guard pretty much every time.

Now I do think Monk as the lowest bust potential. He's gonna be a useful rotation guy, but he certainly *appears* to lack the 2-way upside of a guy like Ntilikina with great hops AND a 7 foot plus wingspan. We will see who Phil likes. Monk is prob the most sure thing to note bust, but do you see him shutting anyone down in the NBA? Anyone? Thats part of it... at least if we are talking building block guys. I would like a building block guy vs. a role player. Now there is more risk in that as well... so I do ack the pendulum swings both ways

Monk is a good defender. I don't know where you get this notion he's not. He has good lateral quickness and challenges shots. He's not a special defensive prospect but he is good enough. His Defensive Rating was 100 which as a small SG was good.

Despite what you think Monk has GREAT potential. As the article mentions he was the only legit 3pt shooter and so teams packed the paint daring the Wildcats to shoot from 3! That means Monk didn't have lanes very often. He'll get many more openings to attack in the NBA!

Just so we're clear you can only GUESS as to whether Ntilikina can take over games like Monk! The same goes for his defense against NBA PG's. The quickness of NBA PG's is unmatched in the French League! Monk has more burst and explosion than Nitty. Monk has shown he's up to the task of being a Primary scorer. 47, 37, 34, 33, 27, 27... Monk isn't a mystery in this regard. You give Monk space and he's gonna produce. Nitty is still working on his handles. He's nowhere close to Elite in this regard.

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/IanBegley/status/875411585778544641

NYKBocker wrote:

NYKBocker wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:Sounds like a martial arts film. We would really be lucky to find a talent like Monk available at 8. Speaks to the depth of the draft pool. This team really needs a good one, two punch going forward.

Or a port ☺

Dang phone auto correct. I meant porno 😀

Was wondering what you were referencing LOL. Sounded like a joke from the Discovery channel.

nykshaknbake wrote:The consensus on Monk is that he will struggle to defend SGs in the NBA due to his height and short wingspan. He's definitely more a SG than PG. Turned it over quite a bit when running the offense. So these hidden dimensions are far from a given. It would be more likely that they don't exist in a significant way. Not saying he can't defend or pass, but don't draft him thinking he's going to be a good defender or ball distributor. He's valuable because he can shoot and probably drive well at an NBA level.

The point is that we're looking for areas to expand Monk's game. He didn't really run Point but that's not the same as saying he CAN'T run point if given more time and coaching. From what I've seen Monk can play PG enough already and will get better.